Main Page Contact Register Log In

What I don't get is that US persons have a very interesting relationship to guns. When I went throught the details of a recent shooting there were the obvious things that everybody talks about. But those were kind of pro and con things and I wouldn't have rised those issues as being pivotal if other people wouldn't have done so. But what happened on the incident that should not have happened? There was a troubled kid and was known to have problems and had several troubles relating to them. Why is this not an error state?

We just kind of have these young people being extreme and nobody cares. Where is the availability and reachability of mental health serivice? These were the kind of troubles where a person would want help for their own benefit or atleast their parent or close family. They woudln't even have to be coerced into treatment and you could almost say that these people do not receive treatment as a violation of their rights. I guess this has something to do that the health care system is not that when you have a condition that needs medical attention that you just walk in and have it fixed. You need to use private money for that if not explicitly for indiviudal treatments then for insurance payments. Then if you don't have the infrastructure already in place when you have a health issue you are pretty much screwed. Then there is the stigma, that seeing yourself as someone who needs to recover from something can make you an outcast in the possibly reduced social circles. And btw why is picking up on mental patients something that doesn't need addressing? This person could also been caught by social services but apparently being hobo like or outcast is the expected norm for some class of people.

Off course once a person does something people are willing to lock him up for good or have them stay in medical facility indefinetely if they survive to be handled. But it remains that looking out which members of your society go berserk is a really bad way of taking note on who needs the most extreme handling. It would be nice to detect the berserkers before they go berserk so it can be prevented. However if being singled as "high chance of berserking" means all your liberties are stripped away that doesn't make anyone come out on their own accord. On the other hand if you rely on people ratting the suspects out you are risking of instilling a big amount of distrust and people minding in to each others business. The DDR style surveilance isn't that fun and the NSA is already uncomfortably close to it. Adverse attitudes to those that are the most messed up makes people less emphathetic and less likely to spend resources to help them. It is much easier to imagine that berserkers are something that can be kept in check with force than taking responcibility for the societal phenomena that create them. In a individualistic society it can be tempting to assume that "some people just are bad" and that the game can never be at fault but you should blame the player. So there is kind of an implict assumtion that "some fraction of people are just going to go berserk, what can we do to mitigate their effects?". Fighting evil becomes fighting evil people instead of making the dark side less tempting.

Most people who go on shooting sprees in the US actually got mental health services.
The problem is just that the services didn't help.

Bad mental health treatment might even be a course of some rampages where drugs get people acting more crazy.
Replies (1)